[78-L] Was " Huh?" Now "Wha?"

[Michael Biel]

From: "Taylor Bowie" <bowiebks at isomedia.com>
> Last, I'm begining to think that Mr. Barr assumes that any young
> person collecting 78s would start doing so by buying several boxes
> (or milk crates) full of random stuff and then deciding to collect
> in some more selective fashion.

As Leah and I were driving this weekend thru the Berkshires where I got
my first wind-ups and my second large batch of records, I was telling
her that this was EXACTLY how I came to record collecting.

> The younger collectors I know started off with an interest in 
> music and then took it from there.
> In other words, for most collectors, the music comes first
> and the records come second...not for all, but for most. Taylor

Like Steve, I also am not so sure about this.  Many come to 78s from an
interest in the medium -- the machines and the physical records
themselves -- and gather a group of random records from which they will
eventually find their likes and dislikes.  They might get records with
the machine they are fascinated with, or else they might find a pile of
records first.  When they come across their first 78s, Looking at the
labels in a store is a complete mystery.  (I found my first 78s in our
attic -- they had been my father's.  Even reading printed descriptions
in a book, or even worse, printed lists in a discography, cannot really
duplicate the experience of hearing the differing records.  However, as
it concerns Whiteman, if the unfortunate newbie gets a hold of one of
the many books which luxuriate in saying nasty things about Whiteman,
then he is likely to miss out on music he might like.  Fortunately in my
case I had already grown to like Whiteman's records before coming across
books like Rudi Blesh.  Yes, if someone hears something on the radio,
internet, or CD and asks how to get more of this, then they might get
led to the 78s, but more likely these days they will be led to the
internet or maybe CDs, not the 78s.  

Mike Biel  mbiel at mbiel.com  





-------- Original Message --------

From: "Taylor Bowie" <bowiebks at isomedia.com>


Mr. Barr wrote:

> Comment ca va (I think the "c" in "ca" should have a little doo-dad on it
> to indicate it is pronounced like "s"...?!).
>
> First, I have over the past few years purchased several large 
> accumulations
> of vintage 78's. Almost all of these were made up of "jazz records" 
> (usually
> of the thirties/early forties)...or common vocal records of the acoustic 
> era
> (i.e. a LOT of Henry Burr, Peerless Quartet(te), Irving Kaufman and such).
> Further, almost all of the commonly-found 78's of the current era are
> from the forties/early fifties; I don't find this stuff to be that 
> enjoyable
> for
> listening...and I suspect most younger folks who acquire accumulations
> of this on 78's would feel as I do...?!
>
> Second, when I said "accepted jazz," I meant "accepted by serious jazz
> lovers as..."! The Whiteman disc you cite is somewhat of an anomaly...?!
>
> However, thinking further, I have realized that a younger person trying
> to collect 78's (here I assume he/she/it has neither knowledge of the
> evolution of popular music of the 20th century...nor access to the
> "standard" 78rpm discographies...?!) is most likely to acquire bunches
> of 1946-54 78's (see above for my comments thereon!). Unlike the
> dance/jazz instrumentals of 1916-3? or the earlier vocal "hits" of
> 1910-2?...there are two considerations?! First, should this "newbie"
> happen to acquire a bunch of "swing era" 78's, there is some listenable
> content; however, much of it is available (and more easily played) on
> CD or LP. Second, if the acquisition is a quantity of the vocal hits of
> 1946-54, I suspect listening to those may well discourage our "newbie"
> from further "adventures in 78-land"...?!
>
> Steven C. Barr


I find Mr. Barr's response to my points to be even more confusing than
was 
his original post. For one thing, he's assuming that no younger person 
has "knowledge of the evolution of popular music of the 20th century"
and 
he assumes that since HE doesn't like much of the singing of Burr, 
Kaufman, etc. then how could anyone who is younger possibly appreciate 
them?

His concept of "accepted jazz" as whatever is considered good by
"serious 
jazz lovers" is about as silly a statement as I've seen made here on
78-L, 
including any of my own odder remarks...ditto his dismissal of the
common 
but superb Whiteman record as an anomaly...I could make a list of great
jazz 
records of the 20s and 30s which are still easy to get for little money,

and I imagine most of the rest of you on 78-L could do so as well.